The last trip that was made to the dyno was 12/10. All along we were trying to make a linear powerband with a wide flat torque curve at a safe AFR not a dyno queen with a peaky powerband. Mike at Thunder Racing is a god among men when it comes to tuning, his specialty might be domestic V-8’s but that doesn’t mean he can’t tune a bike. In the chart is a comparison between the previous mapping as of 10/16 the infamous “R1Evo el cheapo backyard wild-ass guess” based map(in blue) and the final tuning we arrived at yesterday(in red). We chose to make a pull on the previous mapping to compare with the end result so there was no questioning the gains since both maps were being ran under the exact same conditions. The pulls were made on a Mustang dyno and in 3rd gear since the dyno is mainly used for cars and I was turning 4 drums instead of just 2 and the dyno has a motorcycle load setting to further validate our numbers. I’m sure this chart is going to stir up a lot of “discussion”, especially in this thread, but a Mustang dyno is going to give more “real world” numbers than others. We came to the conclusion that the bike makes its most consistent power at 190 degrees, that’s why in the video(and that is me on the bike, nowhere near a 21 y/o like “someone” implied LOL) its cruising at 5K RPM for a short time trying to get the temps back up between pulls, and yes that IS a '12 holding 5K RPM without any stumbles and purring right along.. It was around 48 degrees outside and the humidity was 50%. We decided to start the pull at 6K and stop at 13K since this will be your actual “useable” powerband. In the end, we had a gain of 9rwhpover the previous mapping and flatter power curve with repeatability. I think this more than proves that plenty of SAFE power can be made with a US spec bike on 93 octane fuel using a US stock map as a base tuning on a dyno with a well-qualified tuner and not just relying soley on an AT. Mike believes he can get another 3-5hp by tuning each individual cylinder since we were only using the dyno’s wideband at the collector. The only mods to my bike are slip-ons, y-pipe and a K&N filter.

Nice results. I apologize for clogging the thread with those comments and saying it in the first place. It was a bit reckless and pointless, really. Anyway, I'm done taking up space in here without adding anything of value in the process. Carry on.

Oil, what was the blue curve? Do I read your post correctly as Evo's map? Or a stock ECU map?

The blue line is the previous map, the red lines are from 12/10 dyno session. They are like that for comparison reasons. The map used in was a '12 stock base map using timing from an '11. All the rest is the collaboration of work between R1Evo and myself along with the tuner.

So Oil, Can I twist your arm into letting me try that ECU image that you used with the red curve (plus any fuel tuning file if you used a Bazzaz/PCV to tune the fuel if you were just using the F-T interface or any piggy back unit)?

Ok, enough at each other. I think we can all agree that it is a nice result, and F-T was what made it possible in the end, because we would not have the ability to unlock the ECU and beable to edit it, and to produce those numbers.

The idea that a dyno can or cannot be calibrated is like having a religious or political argument, take it else where....since it has nothing to do with a flash tune interface...as the thread implies...

The idea that a dyno can or cannot be calibrated is like having a religious or political argument, take it else where....since it has nothing to do with a flash tune interface...as the thread implies...

I totally agree, no 2 dynos are going to show the same results. Thats not my issue, my issue begins with the negativity that surrounds this thread.

Great numbers. Im glad the bike did so well. We will continue to improve that map with the individual cylinder testing as soon as i get a chance to weld the dam header... Christmas and kids and bike stuff don't mix my bank account is tapped . lol Thank you for working with me on the maps and i always value your input constructive feed back that you provided to me.

Along with AKDMA, I apologize for clogging this thread with unproductive nonsense. It just rubs me the wrong way when statements get made without facts to back them and the whole situation got totally out of hand. We have worked out our differences of opinion and once again I apologize.

Can anyone actually show me a dyno of somebody who has added a pcv and then compared that to a a flashtune. Even better a pcv with auto tuner vs a flashtune.

I've done a lot of reading now and I personally think there are pros and cons for both. I really am in 2 minds.

This is my personal opinion on that. The PCV and AT is a good bang for your buck set-up. You can make good safe power with it. It's advantages are: most bike tuners are familiar with it, it's pretty much plug & play and when being tuned at the dyno its quick and easy to adjustments and those adjustments are loaded in 10-15 secs. The disadvantages, again this is my personal opinion, in order to control the ign timing or secondary injectors you need to purchase seperate modules which means more $ and space to hide boxes,wiring and assorted shit. With the FT interface you can adjust pretty much everything ECU controlled and remove all restrictions for less money. The disadvantages: most tuners aren't familiar with it and it takes 3-5 mins to make changes in the ECU where the PCV pretty much does it on the fly. If you are paying by the hour for dyno time then it can get expensive. My tuner charged one flat rate and was very familiar with ECU reflash programs since he works with them daily and the FT software was almost identicle to what he works with. I went to 2 different tuners that mainly delt with PCV and they were quoting 8-10 hrs minimum of dyno time(at $90-100 per hour) to tune with FT. One of them quoted more but I think it was because he just didnt want to mess with it. The power increase in the chart I posted up came mainly from ignition timing tuning, we made over 5hp by advancing the timing 2 degrees in some areas. In the end its all in how much you want to spend and finding a tuner that is familiar with ECU reflashing. Money-wise the FT software is the way to go due to the cost and what you can adjust but like I said not every tuner is familiar with it.

Basically I agree with Oilfield. If you can afford both and don't mind spending some extra cash, I think getting the Bazzaz+FT interface is the way to go. It's just faster. Bazzaz controls all injectors, and has the option to switch between 2 maps on the fly, which is a handy feature. Fuel-wise the FT interface can do the same thing as a PCV, it's just a bit more time consuming. But you're removing the risk of a piggyback unit failing and dropping weight, so there are advantages there too. I don't have a tuner and just wanted to try Bazzzaz+AT after hearing a lot of rave reviews. It's a good setup, but a custom tune by a good tuner is going to be the best option.

Great numbers. Im glad the bike did so well. We will continue to improve that map with the individual cylinder testing as soon as i get a chance to weld the dam header... Christmas and kids and bike stuff don't mix my bank account is tapped . lol Thank you for working with me on the maps and i always value your input constructive feed back that you provided to me.

No hurry my brother, we'll get there. Not a problem, glad I can help. This '12 has came a looooong way since I first got it.

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Yamaha R1 Forum: YZF-R1 Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:

Password

Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:

Confirm Password:

Email Address

Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:

OR

Log-in

User Name

Password

Remember Me?

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.